HOME | ABOUT US | CONTACT US
 

 

Academic Freedom
Particularly in Faith-Based Settings
 
Dangers (Based on “Can Evangelicalism Survive in a Context of Free Inquiry?” Lloyd J. Averill)
  • When dogma becomes dogmatism
    • Danger arises when a college becomes captive to a doctrinaire position
    • Because its inclination to claim absolute and exclusive theological truth, colleges may move from doctrine to dogmatism, and be unable to establish the intellectual freedom which distinguishes a university from other social institutions
  • Quest for Truth
    • The encounter with truth requires that we apply methods appropriate to its complex nature
      • Truth about structures is discerned primarily through the objective methods of the sciences – natural, social and historical – and through the rigorous application of critical thought
      • Truth about meanings is learned through the intuition and exercise of faith, hope and love
    • Albert Outler says the Christian College is a place where “truth is sought in all its ‘fullness’ but never imposed; a place of rigour and reverence, of inquiry and worship, of competence and compassion, of truth and love.”
  • Inclusiveness versus indoctrination
    • Universities seek to enlarge and enhance the human experience through the advancement of learning and culture. They are by definition inclusive.
    • Colleges with a mission of greater human completeness (integrity, wholeness), then it acts as “a mediator of human salvation” (Gerhard Spiegler)
    • Colleges should welcome an invigorating pluralism seeking truth in all places, attentive to what God may say through general culture and history.
    • Without a commitment to inclusiveness, colleges may turn genuine inquiry into parochial indoctrination.
  • Clarifiers of faith, or arbiters
    • One function of the university is to achieve moral clarity, as an ingredient for responsible action.
    • We cannot make people moral, but we can illuminate the nature and content of choices. Persuasion is the work of God.
    • Colleges must be committed to morally serious learning, with a goal of clarifying rather than guaranteeing faith.
 
Academic Freedom in a Faith-Based Setting (Based on “Academic Freedom in a Theological Context”, Neil Ormerod)
  • Definition of academic freedom
    • Wright and Wedge define it as “a fundamental right allowing faculty to comment on and study in an unfettered way… the relentless, objective, scholarly pursuit of knowledge and truth for the advancement of the human condition.”
  • Relationship between theologians and faith communities
    • Issues may arise if the college sees the relationship of the church to their discipline as external or internal. Theologians are committed to excellence in intellectual inquiry; in terms of the demands of academic freedom, the internal relation to the church is simply part of the framework within which that freedom is exercised. Although this sets the boundaries, it also recognised that theology and the faith community have a dynamic relationship. The tension must be lived creatively and faithfully.
  • Other examples of internal relationships between academics and external bodies
    • Professional areas establish norms within which the academic community must operate. For example, the professional ethics of social workers are established by the profession as a whole.
    • A constitutional law academic must work within the boundaries set by the constitution, in a way similar to the theologian taking the Bible as a foundational document. The constitution is an authority properly constituted and recognised by the political community of the nation.
  • What does academic freedom mean for students of theology?
    • Students don’t have the ecclesial and academic responsibilities of a professional theologian. Indeed they may not hold to the profession of faith adopted by the academics at the college.
    • The difficulty may arise if the college is training persons for ministry within an ecclesial community; in which case their role extends past education to spiritual formation, and discernment of the appropriateness of the student for such ministry. This role opens up an area of vulnerability.
    • If a student argues a case well, even if it is in opposition to the prevailing doctrine, then a good grade should still be given.
    • However, there are further issues:
      • How are dissenting voices handled in classroom discussion?
      • Are their academic resources available to explore alternative views?
      • Is there the possibility of a student with dissenting views being subjected to harassment by other students?
      • How well do academics ensure non-threatening exploration of views respecting the search for truth?
      • How well do students respect the lecturer’s freedom to explore views that deviate from orthodoxy?
      • Does the college require attendance at Chapel? This may be considered legitimate for students destined for ministry.
      • Are there other formative requirements which cannot be required on academic grounds alone?
    • It would be advisable for a college to have a policy on spiritual harassment.
    • Colleges should also examine their enrolment policies:
      • Requiring students to have references from a pastor or minister.
      • Requests for history of Christian commitment or salvation.
    • These issues are particularly pertinent where students are enrolled in practical courses at a theological college.
  • Academic freedom and the curriculum
    • Often ecclesial bodies have much influence in establishing the curriculum within a college. This is not incompatible with academic freedom, since they are the recipients of the students studying such curriculum.
    • This is analogous with professional bodies determining curriculum content in programs such as education, nursing, accounting and so on.
 
 
Top of page Recommend page Print version Contact  Accessible Version  Imprint